At a mayoral forum on Sunday, Democratic candidates were asked about the process for suspending unruly students.

Anthony Weiner answered: “We cannot let that classroom come to a halt because a teacher [becomes unable to teach]. That teacher has rights. Those students who are not acting out have rights, and we should honor them as well.”

Well, of course. Who would say any different? Try most of Weiner’s opponents.

Comptroller John Liu insinuated students are being tossed out so they don’t bring test scores down.

Former Comptroller Bill Thompson wants “safety agents,” not school administrators, to decide.

Meanwhile, Speaker Chris Quinn boasted that her City Council succeeded in getting statistics released on student suspensions.

In short, with the exception of Weiner, every one of these candidates for mayor focused on the rights of the disrupters, not on those of the majority trying to learn. Or the teachers trying to teach them.

These answers should be deeply troubling for New Yorkers. For on a question that touches on the crucial nexus of education and safety — two of the most important public-policy issues for any city leader — the bulk of the Democratic Party’s candidates for the city’s highest office have no idea whose interests they should put first.

How ironic that a man forced from the House of Representatives over his own misbehavior would emerge as the only candidate at this forum to grasp that disruptive behavior cannot be tolerated.